Return-path: Received: from mail-ew0-f219.google.com ([209.85.219.219]:48044 "EHLO mail-ew0-f219.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932362AbZLNS0L (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:26:11 -0500 Received: by ewy19 with SMTP id 19so3685938ewy.21 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:26:09 -0800 (PST) From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz To: David Miller Subject: Re: Revised wireless tree management practices Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 19:24:47 +0100 Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <200912141559.29282.bzolnier@gmail.com> <200912141720.11465.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20091214.100345.57458443.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20091214.100345.57458443.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <200912141924.47370.bzolnier@gmail.com> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Monday 14 December 2009 07:03:45 pm David Miller wrote: > From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz > Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:20:11 +0100 > > > Well, in theory all maintainers should be testing -next kernels > > so nothing should change also in this regard. > > You conveniently did not quote and respond to my comments showing that > you can ask git tools to seperate out the changesets for you, regardless > of what subsystem maintainers decide to do. > > Power is in your hands, really. :-) That is simply untrue from Linus' kernel point of view. Each networking merge contains multiple sub-merges from wireless tree (at random points in networking tree history) which in turn may contain multiple sub-merges from Johannes (at random points in wireless tree history) and wireless driver sub-projects so unless you are a hardcore networking/wireless developer it is practically impossible to make a sense out of it in a reasonable time. -- Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz